Google now censors this blog in violation of the first amendment. Google should be tried for crimes against the Constitution.
Revelation 20:10
And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.
Copyright 2006 John Best

Monday, March 13, 2006

Knuckleheads of Neurodiversity Attack the Geiers

Since the Geier's gave us more proof that mercury is the cause of the autism epidemic, Neurodiverse knuckleheads have written a bunch of cockamamie junk trying to refute their findings. The curious thread running through all of their nonsense is that they attack the publication. They attack facts irrelevant to the paper, including the fact that the Geier's have acted as expert witnesses. I suppose these lunatics think that some wack job like Autism Diva would be a more appropriate expert witness. She could show up the Geiers easily with her alien abduction theory.Neurodiversity could also throw Prometheus up as an expert. This guy thinks he is a master of statistical analysis yet, when pressed to prove it, balks at the relatively simple task of analyzing a horse race. Anyone who is a true statistical wizard should be able to figure out the small bit of data in the Daily Racing Form as opposed to working with thousands of pieces of evidence contained in VAERS. This alleged expert scientist spends most of his blogging time trying to refute the connection of mercury to autism and claims he only does this to prevent children from being harmed by "quack" treatments. At the same time he is "protecting" children, he advocates shooting more mercury into them. That's some scientist. Support shooting up babies with known poisons and then rant and rave against those who try to remove that poison. Of course, to try to cover his fallacious arguments, Prometheus recently took a refresher course in reasoning and argument so he could write about it and help some less practiced lunatics hone their debating skills. Now, when one decides to question his idiocy of denying the mercury connection, one must put up with freshman style argument refutation which employs citing every known argument fallacy while evading the relevant questions. Prometheus and his lunatic followers can seem semi-intelligent while he can control comments on his blog but I don't think he'd fare very well when forced to answer questions directly by a competent lawyer.Neurodiversity also has some surgeon who calls himself ORAC as an ally. This guy admits that chelation is the proper treatment for mercury poisoning yet rants and raves that chelation won't cure autism. He persists in this idiotic rant in spite of mounting evidence that children are, in fact, being cured of autism with chelation. We hear further moronic assertions that it is invalid to ascribe success to chelation alone since autistic kids improve over time. We are repeatedly reminded by him and his associates that improvement from chelation is not proof of mercury poisoning. The problem with this simplistic answer is that he doesn't tell us why the kids improve with chelation. Some of his wackier associates tell us it is a placebo effect. Perhaps ORAC thinks the kids are improving with chelation because their parents are praying at the same time and God intervened. It boggles the mind how an MD can see kids improve with a medically sanctioned treatment and then claim the improvement was not the result of that treatment. Some guys will say anything to protect their negligent associates who injected too much mercury into infants and now want to cover up their error. That's why ORAC also jumps to denigrate the publication that let us see the truth about mercury in print. He praises the statisticians who knock the Geiers but don't have the smarts to figure out a simple horse race. It's always a good ploy by doctors to knock lawyers. To claim that the VAERS data is suspect because some of the reports were made by lawyers works well when all the idiots who read your junk will agree with this stupid argument. However, when one questions the fact that most people never heard of VAERS and the numbers should be much greater back in the 1990's which would show more of a reduction in autism since the removal of thimerosal from some vaccines, the idiots don't have a response. They just maintain that lawyers have contaminated the data. They don't concern themselves with the statute of limitations and the fact that that statute voids claims by most of the injured children. I guess they figure if they ignore that objection that it will go away.Then we have Kathleen Siedel, the raving maniac of Neurodiversity who has something to say about everything that proves the mercury connection. Her most recent spin against the Geiers claims it is the political far right and their values versus the low brow musings of the far left. How political leanings have anything to do with the science involved is beyond me but that is the gist of her latest deranged rant. Sure, knock the publication's politics when you can't refute what they say. This is how Kathleen helps autistic children. She rants against science that will help them.

44 comments:

Anonymous
said...

Just to let you know Orac/Gorski hates certain statistics. Like those that track his word counts, I still laugh about his production of 6,000+ a day last year. And he did those 6,000+ all by himself, even edited them, not a "SINGLE" error.

Now I notice he's a lot more careful about those counts. Maybe his editors are concerned about over using him?

The Greier's paper is flawed starting with the terminology used, as I've repeatedly indicated. For laughs, check Figure 3 of the paper and try to figure out how it is that they draw the "downward trend" line.

BTW, the kind of logic the Greir's use to determine that the number of "New Cases" of autism is going down was conclussively refuted in my posting titled CDDS Data 101 -- and there has not been a single relevant rebuttal of the data presented to date (María did have some comments, but did not dispute the arguments) despite my invitations to address what I argue there.

When you become a peer reviewed scientist like the Geier's, then you can criticize them.

And how do you know I haven't published in a peer reviewed journal? I'm not going to give full details, but for a short while when I was in school I co-authored some papers in the field of Computer Science. Not that that's relevant, but you make too many assumptions.

Joe; Just because you helped write something about computers doesn't make you qualified to critique ballet dancing or anything else. The Geiers are legitimate scientists who are helping children with their research. They are better qualified than you to determine the proper way to interpret some numbers. After all, their work stood the test of peer review. I think you have more learning to do before you will be qualified to critique them.

Joe; Sure, this is America where you can critique anyone. You can critique the Red Sox manager if you want. I suspect he has a better idea how to run the team than you. Just because you write some verbose complaint that Dr Geier didn't consult you before he wrote his paper doesn't make you right. Are you taking lessons from Kathleen on how to put readers to sleep with excess verbiage?

So according to you, peer-reviewed research published in serious well-respected journals is all a big conspiracy. Meanwhile, allegedly peer-reviewed research published in a reputedly fringe journal (which apparently does not print retractions) is great research we should learn from.

Joe; What you call a fringe journal reports facts. The majority consider it to be valid science. It is just a few sadistic people who don't want to help autistic children who call it a rag. The things you favor that you call respectable are financed by the drug companies who poisoned you into autism. Why do you support liars who harmed you? That doesn't make much sense.

Joseph; Your position of supporting those who cause autism is the thing that's absurd. That would be like me supporting a jockey who choked a horse that I bet on. If you get yourself cured, you'll be able to see the flaw in your logic.

Kevin; It's a funny thing about blogger. You indent to start the paragraphs and, when you publish it the indentations disappear. Mind telling me what :o) means? I'm not surprised the point went over your head.

Joe; You missed the connection. It wasn't about the horse. It was about the integrity of the jockey as compared to the integrity of the drug industry. If you got yourself cured, I might not have to explain these things to you.

Mercury is all around (rescuing a generation)In teeth and hair it can be found (rescuing a generation)People think what they are t-t-told (rescuing a generation)Your science-speak is g-g-gettin' old (rescuing a generation)

This is hype generationThis is hype generation, babies

Why don’t you all key-key-late (trans-dermal chelation)And buy some more D-M-SA (bankrupting a generation)We're just trying to cause a big s-s-sensation (rescuing a generation)I’m just rescuing a whole g-g-g-generation (rescuing degeneration)

This is hype generationThis is hype generation, babies

Why don’t you all drop R-N-A (Yasko has the formulation)And don’t try to*#@& what the %$*# we s-s-say (talkin’ ’bout some denigration)I’m just trying to save the whole damn n-n-nation (talkin' 'bout my own damnation)By placin' ads in p-p-publications (talkin’ ’bout child exploitation)

This is hype generationThis is hype generation, babies

Conspiracies and plots abound (callin' for investigation)Government can't keep us d-d-down (rescuing a generation)David Kirby's books are s-s-sold (documenting veneration)Yeah, I hope they rot and gather mold (media for cultivation)